Image TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage Tile
Image size: 6144x7680 Scale: 35% - PanoJS3
Page overview thumbnail

Article text

VALUATIONS FOR PROBATE.
a question of procedure.
\ suit, under the Crown 'Remedies Act
was dealt with yesterday -in the Practice
Court, when Mr. Justice a'Beckctt gave a
reserved judgment. .
The proceedings had reference to the ad
ministration of the Probate Act 1S90, which
directs what is to be done when the Com
missioner of Taxes and the executors of an
estate differ as to the value put upoii a
property named, in the executors' state
ment' of duty. This bet provides that if
the Commissioner is dissatisfied lie shall
appoint a valuer and communicate Iris
valuation to tlie executors, arid the Com
missioner is further given power to agree
with tlie executors upon the value to be
adopted; or he may summon the cxecu-,
tors' valuers aud his own valuer, take evi
dence on both sides, and then, "upon such
evidence, determine the value."
It the present matter. Herbert Robinson
Brookes and Norman Edward Brookes, as
executors under the Will of the late Wil
liam Brookes, had a dispute with the. Com
missioner as to the viilne of 26,663 shares in
the Australian Paper Mills Co. 'They
valued them, in the first instance, at £1
per share, being the paid . up value of tho
shares. The ' Commissioner thought the
value was too low. A valuer was appoint
ed by the Commissioner, who assessed the
value at 26/ per share. The executors were
willing to agree to this valuation; but the
Commission was himself of opinion that
27/3 was the _ real Value. The executors
eventually paid duty at that rate under
protest, end now sought to recover the dif
ference between 26/ and 27/3, which
amounted to £168. .
His Honor held that the Commissioner
was not entitled to the £166, and ordered
that the money be refunded. This order,
however, would. not), he said, prejudice the
right of the Commissioner to proceed l>y
Bummnns and ascertain by determination
the amount properly payable for duty on
the shares. The petitioners and respon
dent in the. present application must pay
their own costs.
$